Awareness Support in Global Software Development: A Systematic Review Based on the 3C Collaboration Model
Download as PPTX, PDF1 like830 views
This document presents the results of a systematic review on awareness support in global software development based on the 3C collaboration model of communication, coordination, and cooperation. The review analyzed 79 studies published between 2000-2016. It found that most studies (79%) introduced new tools to provide awareness by gathering source code information to support coordination and cooperation. While studies focused most on coordination support, communication and context awareness were still under-explored areas. Opportunities for future work included providing real-time awareness of team members' physical locations and contexts beyond coding phases.
![Systematic ReviewAims to present a fair evaluation of a research topic by using a trustworthy, rigorous, and auditable methodology [Kitchenham, 2004]Consists of three stages:Review PlanningReview ConductionReview Analysis4Kitchenham, B.: Procedures for performing systematic reviews. Tech. rep., KeeleUniversityand NICTA (2004)](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/criwgsteinmacherchavesgerosa-100922093557-phpapp02/85/Awareness-Support-in-Global-Software-Development-A-Systematic-Review-Based-on-the-3C-Collaboration-Model-4-320.jpg)
Awareness Support in Global Software Development: A Systematic Review Based on the 3C Collaboration Model
- 1. Awareness Support in Global Software Development: A Systematic Review Based on the 3C Collaboration ModelIgor SteinmacherAna Paula Chaves SteinmacherMarco Aurelio Gerosa
- 2. TypesofStudiesPrimary studies experiments, case studies, surveys etc.Secondary studies (e.g. systematic review)for a specific subject analyze the existing literature Gather and give interpretation to spread empirical dataAnalyze evidencesIdentify new research areas 2
- 4. Systematic ReviewAims to present a fair evaluation of a research topic by using a trustworthy, rigorous, and auditable methodology [Kitchenham, 2004]Consists of three stages:Review PlanningReview ConductionReview Analysis4Kitchenham, B.: Procedures for performing systematic reviews. Tech. rep., KeeleUniversityand NICTA (2004)
- 5. Review Planning: ProtocolResearch QuestionsQ1: What are the awareness studies carried out in order to improve the Global Software Development scenario?Q2: Which of the 3Cs are these studies supporting?5
- 6. 3C CollaborationModelBorghoff, U.M. and Schlichter, J.H. (2000): Computer-Supported Cooperative Work: Introduction to Distributed Applications. Springer, USA.Ellis, C.A., Gibbs, S.J. & Rein, G.L. (1991): Groupware - Some Issues and Experiences. Communications of the ACM, Vol.34, No. 1, pp. 38-58.6
- 7. Review Planning: ProtocolKeywords defined based on research questions7
- 8. Review Planning: ProtocolSearch SourcesScience@Direct (http://www.sciencedirect.com)El Compendex (http://www.engineeringvillage.com)IEEE Digital Library (http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/) ACM Digital Library (http://portal.acm.org)Only studies written in English and with online full paper available were considered8
- 9. Review Planning: ProtocolInclusion/Exclusion process:1. Paper title and keywords analysis2. Analysis based on the reading of papers abstracts and keywords, considering research questions3. Analysis of introduction, conclusion, and specific parts related to the contributions4. All studies selected so far were read by the researchers and documented on a proper form9
- 10. Review Planning: ProtocolThe first three steps were performed by two researchers, independentlyAll the steps were reviewed by a more experienced researcherWe've dismissed:studies related to awareness which did not focus on GSD domainstudies related to a same tool or environment, keeping just the most recent one (classifying them as duplicated)10
- 11. Review Planning: ProtocolStudies categorization:(i) case studies(ii) theoretical studies(iii) experiments(iv) tools (including frameworks and architectures)(v) literature reviews11
- 12. Review Planning: ProtocolStudies were also categorized according to the level of support of each 3C model dimensions3: Mainly supports2: Also supports1: Indirectly supports0: Does not support 12
- 13. ReviewConductionQuery string is used to retrieve the candidate studiesPrimary studies are identified, selected and evaluated according to the process defined in the review protocol13
- 14. Review ConductionDistribution of studies found14
- 15. ReviewAnalysisData from the studies selected are extracted and synthesizedAnalysis performedStudies per yearStudies per type3C collaboration model categorization15
- 16. Review AnalysisAmount of relevant studies per year16
- 17. Review AnalysisVenn Diagram for type of primary studies1799335
- 18. Review AnalysisDistribution according to 3C model1827399
- 19. Review Analysis: tools classification according to the 3C model
- 20. Conclusions79% of primary studies introduce a new tool with some awareness support to GSDgathering information from source code version management repositories, provide awareness, supporting coordination and cooperation.Regarding 3C modelStudies focus on coordinationCommunication is poorly explored20
- 21. Conclusions: some opportunities Lack of studies and tools offering solutions that could provide awareness regarding recent (or real time) contextNo studies merging ubiquitous computing, GSD and awarenessFew studies dealing with how to use awareness regarding the physical location of a team member21
- 22. Conclusions: some opportunitiesWe could not find studies providing awareness support to development phases other than codingWe have not found studies dealing with awareness to overcome issues related to cultural, political, geographical differencesLack of awareness initiatives to avoid ambiguity and misunderstandings22
- 23. ConclusionsAwareness for GSD is an area that is growing lately, presenting a large number of studies published
- 24. There still available for more research
- 25. More details regarding this review can be found at www.igor.pro.br/awarenessRS23
- 26. LimitationsWe did not perform our search into every possible sourceClassification is a human process and can be considered subjective24
- 27. Thank you!Marco A. Gerosa University of Sao Paulo gerosa@ime.usp.br25